Bill O’Reilly, Mary Katherine Ham have a knock down drag out on legalizing marijuana

Wow. BillO and Mary Katherine Ham really got into it over legalizing marijuana. BillO is on the side that says it should be a banned substance and that whatever we are spending now pales in comparison to the social cost of what we will be spending if marijuana is legalized. Mary Katherine Ham, on the other hand, believes it should be legalized and that this cost differential that BillO sites…well, let’s just say she’s a little skeptical.

But where this gets ugly is BillO believes the impact on children will be devastating long-term if we legalize it for adults. Mary Katherine Ham disagrees, citing the fact that there are already illegal substances that teenagers have to decide whether or not to associate with and marijuana won’t really be any different. BillO didn’t like her answer and accused her of dodging the question.

Wherever you come down on this issue, Mary Katherine Ham went toe to toe with BillO and never let him push her around. That’s worth watching just on it’s own.

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

Like I’ve said over and over again, it’s easy to argue for the legalization of drugs when you’re living on THIS side of the consequences. It’s when you find yourself on the OTHER side of the consequences when it really starts to dawn on you how STUPID legalization is. Everything appears feasible and reasonable from the comfort of a relatively drug free society. But when everyone’s doping and dealing, when children are hooked and society is collapsing under the weight of its own addictions, that’s when the honeymoon suddenly comes to a tragic and fatal end….and so does America.

O’Reilly’s a douche, but I agree with him — they should not legalize it, because progressivism is a slippery slope, and just as with anything co-opted by the left, the push for “normalization” will have deleterious outcomes.

Sadly true. I’d be all for legalizing the drug if it’s “magical” medicinal properties were capsulized without the intoxication. Unfortunately, pro-MJ people just want to smoke it and get high. That’s the reality. They wouldn’t be as vocal about it if it didn’t provide them with their intoxication.

stage9

You nailed it.

Guest

That’s great. But even if the case is MJ is the ONLY thing that could help this poor girl, then it should be an exception rather than the rule.

In my state, medical marijuana cards are being given out for things like chronic diarrhea. And it has to be smoked, right?

DarkHorse74

The thing is there are medical drugs that can do the same thing that Marijuana supposedly does and are more effective.

That argument is a straw man. 99% of those who are championing “medical marijuana” really want it legalized so they can get high. They’re really not caring about AIDS, glaucoma, seizures or whatever disease of the month that marijuana allegedly miraculously cures.

SurfinUSA

MK Hamm conceded the issue of not making pot legal for children but BlowHard pounded out that as the issue. He admitted he had no problem with pot use for adults, which Hamm agreed with. She also said she was against pot legality for children.

BlowHard tried to crush Hamm for no reason. He was making a mountain out of a molehill (that he is a master of doing). She is strong enough to not cower to his b.s. Look to see that she won’t be a regular on his show for long for daring to stand up to his BigS*hitness.

Jose

I don’t want my tax dollars going to investigate, prosecute, and incarcerate some moron for frying his brain. That’s his problem.

Those resources would be better spent going after violence and theft.

stage9

And then it becomes YOUR problem when the state is FORCED to deal with said moron, who is so addicted that he has to find creative new ways to finance his addiction by breaking into your house or mine.

The inability of most Americans today to even reason through issues saddens me.

Michael Balkin

I’ve always respected and admired Bill O’Reilly. Specifically, I always was amazed by his ability to examine an issue without much bias. But sometimes he has a strong personal opinion, very strong in some cases, that clouds his viewpoint.

I rarely agree with O’Reilly and find him extremely bombastic, but in this case I do. Mary Katherine is a smart girl, but a young mother and inexperienced. I’ve seen a child from a good family having to bankrupt themselves to save a child that was eventually not redeemable; $80,000 one year and then again. This child was one for whom marijuana was the gateway drug to his addictive personality. I guess things might work out better under Obamacare when we all have to pay for the treatment of the new born addicts due to this liberalization. It will be good to have the bankruptcy and poverty spread around amongst us all including Mary Katherine the tax payer.

Susanna958

I believe its a gateway drug because its illegal. In order to get it someone has to come in contact with a drug dealer who has more than pot to offer. Sold legally, that won’t happen.

DarkHorse74

I highly doubt that. If you hang around people that do Marijuana your going to come in contract with other drugs as well, it’s unavoidable.

PapaLouie

Let’s see how many drug dealers leave Colorado. Now that pot is legal, everyone assumes the illegal market will dry up. But why would it when the markup and taxes are so high? With demand rising from new customers and pot tourists, drug dealers will be drawn to Colorado like moths to a flame.

RosiesSeeingRed

Show me a crime-ridden city with “alcohol lords” and “cigarette dealers” on every corner. There may be a black market for both of these legal substances, but it certainly is not the reason why you turn on the news each night and learn of another drug-related shooting or gang violence.

PapaLouie

Did you know that a smuggler can make about $2 million on a single truckload of cigarettes? It is so lucrative in high-tax states that trafficking in black-market cigarettes has now begun to rival drug trafficking as a funding choice for terrorist groups. It is also a popular funding source for gangs, and yes rivals do murder each other to gain control of prime markets. Do a Google search for “black market cigarettes fund terrorism” to have your eyes opened.

Legalizing pot will not cut crime, it will likely expand it because it is easier to sell a smuggled legal substance than an illegal one. If buyers are not being arrested, they have no reason to give up their supplier. As taxes increase, so does the black market. And the black market will offer more than just the legal stuff, so the gateway to harder drugs will still be readily available. Legalization is not going to change that, it will just increase the size of the customer base.

Bette

We train our children not to do things that are illegal! I guess that is a quaint notion in this modern era. We then should be able to solve all of our cultural ills by just making things legal that are now illegal. The 60’s have landed!

Godsavemycountry

He crossed the line by bringing up her young daughter in a public discussion. That was dirty. it was clear that MKH was incensed that O’Reilly brought her daughter into the debate without her consent. I think that really heightened her intensity. I don’t agree that pot should be legalized. But I hate the way O’Reilly behaves on his show especially towards his commentators. They must get a lot of money and crave the limelight to put up with the way he treats them on his show. UGH!

TRONRADIO

Bill got ‘Hammered’ tonight. I very much enjoyed it. Ham respectfully and logically won the debate.

Autonoe

In the interview, she wasn’t expecting her kid to be brought up in this debate. I bet that ticked her off.

tinlizzieowner

It’s always ‘OK’ (when it’s somebody else’s kid). 😉 😉

timsrighty

BillO didn’t have Juan Williams to take all the airtime on this one. Good job Mary Katherine.

TruLevinian

The ego just drips off this guy. He’s almost the worst thing at Fox. Second only to Shemp Smith.

bahamianhoosier

Come on now…Juan, Beckel?! Pretty tough competition!

TruLevinian

I’m just talkin bout the hosts. But if we were talking in general, Juan is definitely the king of a holes. Beckel not far behind but at least he can be somewhat likeable. Juan is just a punk.

TruLevinian

I think Bill IS the problem. Right along with Rove, Boehner, Cantor, and all the other phonies.

If we were a more responsible society, I’d be fine with neither legalizing nor criminalizing pot. The truth is, we are not prepared to deal with it, so I’m all for banning it. Maybe down the road, in a better time…

dlg1956

The ‘war’ on drugs is nothing more than a government way to justify budgets by deamonizing the killer drug marijuana. Reefer Madness is everywhere and it eradication is far more important than our liberties.
As for me, I’ll take my chances with liberty.

B-Funk

Yah, I’ll pass on the Fed involvement too.

Crassus

I’ve never thought highly of Mary Katherine Ham. Nothing but a Coulter/Malkin/Ingraham wannabe. I think even less of the Leprechaun. This debate sinks very close to battle of wits between unarmed opponents territory.

ScarlettNY

The cartels don’t want it legalized. It takes all the profit out for them. If we had closed borders it would not be a big deal. Good luck to the Feds when drug cartels have enough of US Citizens taking away their profit. It’s going to be messy.

dlg1956

So let’s let the cartels continue making money for something that should be legal? No money no cartels

DarkHorse74

I imagine it would be the same if two grocery stores opened within close proximity to one another. They will compete for business, prices may go down but one wont necessarily put the other out of business. I think it will be the same with cartels competing against legal distributors. But cartels do have an advantage in not having to deal with taxes and can always sell other illegal drugs to make up for any losses. Will it put a dent in their profits? Maybe, maybe not. But it won’t put them out of business.

ObiWanKenobi

Please. There is no inventory system for dope. “Cartels” will still sell cheap dope to cheap dopers. The “distributors” aren’t going to cure any problems that exist today or create a windfall of tax revenue for tomorrow’s idiot, dope head masses.

PicklePlants

If you want to skip Bill’s bloviating, jump to the 4:00 minute mark. Hat tip me.

WhiteGuy2

Don’t care about this issue other than if I want to smoke a joint, or have a beer its nobodies damn business but mine. What part of freedom, and liberty do you not understand?

I had a high school football coach that constantly talked up the “evils of drug use.” The guy would not shut up about it. One day I’m watching TV and he was arrested for selling pot. This was back in the 70s. He’s probably still in Huntsville.

OBill reminds me of that coach. Would not be surprised if OBill lights up every night. He’s such a pompous pudknocker.

John3_3

Mary keeps dodging the point Bill is making. It may not be legal for children, but when the people (the govt) legalize it, they are saying that it is socially acceptable. Period. Legalizing another intoxicant is not a good thing.

theknob

Society must look somewhere else for leadership. Certainly not government. God perhaps? Force is never the answer. Example is.

giveususfree

I love it how many pro-pot people have convinced themselves that pot isn’t harmful, and even has no carcinogens, heh, and they accuse the Right of being anti-science….

famouswolf

Two comments.
1) BillO is a waste of oxygen.
2) Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

imatellau

congradulation to colorado…
I say lets give it 2 years to see the results…
my prognostication is FAILURE!! pots legal… but it AINT FREE!!!

ObiWanKenobi

I’m not a fan of O’Reilly but he makes a valid point; desensitizing is very real and going to serve as a haunting fact in our children’s lives. Tattoos, drugs, self indulgence, and bombardment of sexuality is serving to desensitize generations. What is next?
One day in the future, there will be a 63 year old man with tattoos from his neck down to his wrists, smoking marijuana, living in government housing who shakes his head when he sees what his granddaughter is doing to herself or her posterity. “What’s wrong with kids today?” he’ll think to himself.

famouswolf

What is next?
Lots of bad stuff if this drift into anarchy and stupid self indulgence isn’t stopped soonest.
Heh, but from your post you already know that.

theknob

All that is needed is to make people responsible for their actions. Society will take care of the rest. Look to the history of alcohol to see what happened.

ObiWanKenobi

The aim of the populous is to artificially remove consequence from potheads. Society is it’s own worst enemy in this scenario.

CalCoolidge

O’Reilly’s point is as valid as anyone holding up one grain of sand while ignoring the rest of the beach.

Alcohol and tobacco kill millions. Prescription drugs are the number one cause of accidental death.

ObiWanKenobi

And? Are those the merits of marijuana? Seriously? Why is it that every dope heads best argument FOR dope is how bad everything else is?

mediaaccess

I want marijuana legal, but the communists want it legal for a different reason. Mostly, they think it’ll make you stupider and easier to control. But it should be legal.

famouswolf

They are correct.
It should never be legal, and the penalties should be increased, even made draconian.

theknob

You need to move to Iran dude….

famouswolf

Piss off.

WhiteGuy2

The war on drugs has failed, how bout a live and let live policy on non interference in other peoples lives.

tinlizzieowner

Start with the Obama administration. 😉

famouswolf

Yeah, it would be nice if I didn’t have to worry about some clown all happy on grass and halfway in wonderland, not able to tell the difference between that and reality running over my a** on a sidewalk…booze is bad enough, but at least it’s just dulling reflexes, dizziness and a loss of inhibitions and judgement. Marijuana is a whole different ballgame. So how about not interfering in other people’s lives by not using crap that changes reality so much you don’t even realize where reality and fantasy part. By all means.
No legal marijuana, ever. Increase penalties, make it’s use too costly in every way. Maybe we can save ourselves a lot of trouble and unnecessary interference in other people’s lives, heh? The stuff should be illegal, and I’m someone who wants as little nanny interference as possible. Unfortunately to have a civilization there have to be rules and borders to behavior. If everything is allowed, no civilization. This is the same paradigm as homosexuality in that way. WHERE DO YOU STOP? My impression of you ‘legalize pot’ types is that you won’t stop. Next year it’ll be hashish or cocaine, won’t it? Like pedophilia or bestiality for the sex freaks.

Or are you just too selfish, inconsiderate, and irresponsible to see the difference? Is your grass induced fantasy and giggles just too precious for you to see how it can INTERFER WITH OTHER PEOPLES LIVES, and make tragedy so much more likely than booze ever could? Not to mention being an EXCELLENT hook for worse drugs, as others have pointed out and which point you sneer at. You and the rest of the selfish ‘I want a high with no responsibility’ crowd make me sick.

wodiej

the fact that you think pot is worse than alcohol shows your lack of being reasonable about this topic. You veer off into bestaility which has nothing to do with marijuana.

famouswolf

It does take a certain IQ to see the conceptual relationship, wodiej.
I don’t really give a sh*t whether you think I’m ‘reasonable’ about it or not.

CalCoolidge

It doesn’t take much for a reader to figure out your lack of regard for reasonableness.

Laurel

So says someone who says this…”And by the same logic, you ban marijuana types will be back next week banning religion, free speech, guns and private property.”

CalCoolidge

Right.
And by the same logic, you ban marijuana types will be back next week banning religion, free speech, guns and private property.

Laurel

Absurd.

ryanomaniac

10,000 people were murdered on the streets you were just talking about because they were drunk and driving. I’d say alcohol does just a little more than cause dizziness.

Laurel

Why is that? How m,any have been killed by drugs and drug related crimes?

WhiteGuy2

All these negatives you complain about still happen with or without legalization so carry on wining and judging others because it makes you feel superior. The most addictive drugs on the market are legal and you probably have one or two in your medicine cabinet. Am I to conclude they are there for recreation only or do they have some other purpose?

For the record I haven’t had a joint in years but if I wanted to , I should be able to simply because its none of your damn business..

CalCoolidge

That’s because it’s a phony war against only certain drugs.

It’s not a rational argument. Alcohol and tobacco have killed millions. It doesn’t make any sense for someone to be against decriminalizing marijuana instead of being for criminalizing alcohol and tobacco.

And the number 1 cause of accidental death – prescription drugs.
Getting worked up over marijuana makes as much sense as getting worked up over finding a wasted penny in federal government.

Laurel

So alcohol and tobacco have killed millions and under that justification you want to legalize drugs that have also killed millions and add to the problem?

Sorry I’m not seeing your logic.

RosiesSeeingRed

That’s because you lumped marijuana in with all drugs, stating they have killed millions, when you know for a fact that if you compared marijuana deaths to cigarette and alcohol deaths, his point is perfectly logical.

Laurel

No. I didn’t but the reality is drugs and drug related crimes have killed millions. And drug abuse is drug abuse. alcohol and tobacco are drugs and I would say alcohol is much a comparative since it can and does alter cognitive state where as cigarettes do not.

RosiesSeeingRed

OK, appreciate your opinion on that though I disagree on marijuana vs. alcohol death statistics, but nonetheless it’s all nonsense until I see conservatives en masse fighting to outlaw alcohol the way they fight against marijuana.

Laurel

I think you have a fair point on that and I’m going to think about it and do some research Rosie.

I personally think introducing even more substances into society through a moral relativist window is bad. Real bad.
We see the problems with the current set of legalized drugs and we want to add to it? However I acknowledge that people have a right to ruin their own lives…provided they ruin their own and not those around them and society. If we are to legalize ALL drugs, and that is what it boils down to, then measures have to be put in place to protect the public at all levels up to and including taxes and entitlements.

RosiesSeeingRed

Ah, we have found common ground. I too believe there must be regulations and protections in place. I’m not advocating for a free-for-all, but I can’t help seeing the hypocrisy in allowing alcohol but not allowing marijuana. As I stated above, my friend lost a son to alcohol poisoning (at a legal drinking age), something that would’ve never happened if marijuana were legal and he had chosen to smoke pot instead.

Laurel

Rosie I am sorry about your friend but I have to say there is absolutely no way of knowing he would of chosen pot over alcohol. Take note that even you use the word ‘if’. The trouble with loved ones dying, especially children, is we wallow and torture ourselves with the ‘what if’s’. Don’t do that to yourself. It doubles the already hard to bear the pain.

I just think that if we are going to have liberty, then let’s have true liberty and put serious measures in place to protect the taxpayer and public and for once let’s do it simultaneously so we don’t have a plethora of tragedies. Prohibition came about due to tragedies of drug and alcohol abuse. Heck that is why drugs became illegal.
We have far too many tragedies now with alcohol abuse and society pays through the nose for it.

P.S. we have more common ground than you might think but I have a much different approach.

RosiesSeeingRed

“P.S. we have more common ground than you might think but I have a much different approach.”

LOL, I was typing pretty much the same thing in a reply to your comment above. 🙂

means “The use of drugs”]…I warn you that those who live like this will not
inherit the kingdom of God.”[Gal.5:20,21]. Go argue with God!

WhiteGuy2

Ok no Advil for you. Not even sedation next time you have surgery, its of the devil.

ernst1776

That’s a bit of a stretch.

johnfromjersey

You’re being very Christian in your reply. It’s more than just a stretch!

Laurel

Is it? How so?

CalCoolidge

Maybe in your theocracy you can ban the entire practice of medicine.

Laurel

Interesting. I did not know the original Greek meaning. Thanks for the information.

Conservative_Utopia

I recall a COPS episode where a sting was set up arresting people in low rent neighborhood for buying dime bags of pot. Talk about cutting off the wrong end of the snake.

The opiates, cocaine and meth is what are literally destroying families. Pot, alcohol and tobacco just don’t compare – they are much smaller gateways.

Conservative_Utopia

A great place to fight the war on devastating drugs is at the border.

John Bohler

Indeed, secure the border, then the war on Drugs will turn around for the better.

Problem is no one is willing to secure it. -.-

tinlizzieowner

” …. they are much smaller gateways.”.
But ‘gateways’, none the less. 😉

ObiWanKenobi

Maybe you didn’t hear it, less than .2% of incarcerated are locked up for solely marijuana related crimes. Pretending there is some disproportionate war on potheads doesn’t make it so.

Laurel

That is correct.

Conservative_Utopia

Talk about putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say any of that. But if you want to talk disproportion consider the ordinance, time, money, focus spent on the war on “potheads” compared to a .2% incarceration rate. It’s a farce. Let’s help the families destroyed by crack and meth and opiates.

ObiWanKenobi

You most certainly said all of that. You are attempting to equate law enforcement on marijuana with meth, opiates, etc. but the figures do not even come close. What “war on potheads”? Potheads are fostered and nurtured as they grow into old cockroaches, living on the dole and blaming everyone else for their bullsiht lack of opportunities. It’s always the same 5-8 “successful pot heads” that are touted. No one talks about how great their doper surgeon is or how stoned the great airline pilot can get. The exponential majority of potheads will end up as a drain on society and pass it on to the next generation.

Conservative_Utopia

Obi Wan be trippin’ on another planet. Fare the well, Jedi master.

ObiWanKenobi

That’s what I thought.

Guest

Sorry, don’t trust closet Obama worshipper Bill ‘O!

spin43

Dopers will vote for Obamanism. They will probably expect subsidies because it will be for medicinal use.

wodiej

O’Reilly likes to push people around-especially women. As for the subject at hand, marijuana is no worse than alcohol and that’s legal. They tax the hell out of it too. Look at all the money spent to imprison marijuana offenders. It’s stupid. If anything we should be getting more counselors not more prisons. The damage done to these folks housed with violent offenders just makes things worse. Parents teach your kids right and they will be much less likely to get into trouble.

CalCoolidge

O’Reilly is the kind of idiot who actually pushes me to the other side of the argument the more he talks. In that way, he reminds me of the pro-abortion people.

And it’s a rigged game. O’Reilly is both the referee and a player in the game, and then he thinks he “won.”

RosiesSeeingRed

Exactly why I never watch him. Well said!

theknob

I have to say I agree with MKH on this. I am pretty sure she is a libertarian on this issue as am I. If you are not infringing on my rights then go for it. If it is your thing. It is a social issue and not game for politicians. The U. S. Constitution should rule. Societal mores should rule or not. However make no mistake…infringe on my God given rights and there should be a huge price. Period.

Laurel

And therein lies the flaw in your logic. Drug abuse of all types is infringing on your rights already and that will increase. You pay for it through rehabilitative justice, tax payer funded rehab, incarceration, higher insurance rates, entitlements. Most that are victims of drug abuse up to and including death never ever get any compensation or even justice. the recidivism rate for drug crimes, all drug crimes, is astounding.

theknob

… a a a…NO. The items that you list above should not be tax payer funded. If the feel good left and others want to help those who have abused then that is their business. Charity. As far as victims of drug abusers, that is for the courts. The penalties for “infringing” upon another should be great. The “flaw in your logic” is that government should fix everything which is what is wrong with our country and far from what the founders envisioned. Laws should not be used to enforce societal mores. That should come from society, parents, etc.

Laurel

Does reading comprehension escape you?

You already do pay for it and that payment will be expanded exponentially. Do not blame me if you have no idea where your tax dollars are going and just exactly how much rehabilitative justice there is. You want to tell me you have never ever heard of court ordered rehab? There is a reason we have a huge criminal recidivism rate in this country.

And dear laws are used to fix societal problems hence the reason we have laws against murder, rape, theft then go on to things like arson or environmental polluting, etc. Laws fixed societal problems by putting the brakes on perceived wrong doing as well as offering legal recourse for victims of wrong doing both in criminal and civil courts.

Wake up.

theknob

You still don’t get it. I suppose you never will. Government is NOT the answer and has failed to the extent of killing millions of people over history.

This fight is a distraction. Same with abortion (although abuse of abortion has risen to holocaust levels and must be dialed back, no matter what anyone believes).

We need the libertarian-minded right siders in this fight to restore the Constitution. So this particular battle is a waste of time. As bad as drugs are, especially meth and some of the so-called “designer” drugs and “date rape” drugs, we will never reduce the problem as long as the statists are in charge.

That’s not an order of completion, it’s simply a list of priorities, the first three of which must be worked on simultaneously, right. freaking. now.

theknob

Agree totally but not necessarily libertarian leaning but those who will work to enforce the U.S. Constitution as written not interpreted. Precedent law has screw this country from the beginning.

johnfromjersey

Hey guys is it any wonder?
When 70% of OUR Senate and over 35% of OUR House of Representatives are lawyers, our whole system becomes one giant tort case.
Congress was never intended to be anyone’s career.
Also, Congress was never intended to be run by lawyers.
The House was intended to be made up of Americans from all walks of life, all professions, not just Attorneys.

Laurel

It has and it hasn’t. I think the SCOTUS needs to be a little less reluctant to overturn precedent or bad decisions but at the same time I understand not wanting to re-try every single solitary case in history to the devolving of morality.

theknob

Less reluctant!!! It never happens! It is NOT for the people, precedent is for the expediency of the courts, lawyers and those who want to oppress or paid “good money” to lawyers for it.

Laurel

Really?

So Jim Crow laws are still in effect?

theknob

You betcha! And worse…i.e.Obamacare

Laurel

Is there something wrong with you?
Because that was one of the most absurd and ignorant statements I have as yet to read in over ten years of blogging.

It is apparent you do not know what Jim Crow laws are. Jim Crow laws are segregation laws that were a precedent over turned by SCOTUS. No one in their right mind would compare Obamacare, whether they hate it or support it, to Jim Crow laws.

No one.

theknob

Hmmmm… No argument? Then insults are the only option I guess? I live in the south and know very well what the “Jim Crow” laws were and still are. I know as well that there are “Jim Crow” type laws that are in Obamacare. Racist and discriminatory to one group or another. Do a little reading of the law and less uninformed blogging for a change.

Laurel

I gave you an argument and what you gave me is stupidity. Sorry but calling something for what it is, while it might be insulting, it is only to those who are stuck on it and it. You are trying to divert attention away from your post and cover your backside. Why not admit you confused the law with something else rather than double down?

Under no circumstances can anyone origami any logic what so ever into a comparison of Obamacare and Jim Crow laws. It is comparing horses to kumquats.

And I don’t care if you live in the South or not. Makes no difference and it isn’t verifiable regardless. If you think that gives you some sort of leg up you are sadly mistaken.

By all means provide examples of racism for us verbatim in Obamacare and show us exactly how those laws specifically discriminate against Blacks. Be sure to point out directly where any policy or any single thing within the law specifically states that if you are Black you cannot have a particular doctor, service, and must be segregated from whites.

And I have read the entire law. Do not make assumptions. And hypocrite don’t cry about insults then hurl a few yourself.

theknob

Keep trying but to no avail. Sad response. Jim Crow laws discriminated. So does Obamacare based on income. Period. End of argument. You are so entrenched in your belief that more government and laws are the answer that you can’t see the forest for the trees. Freedom and respect for your fellow human being is the answer….for everyone.

Laurel

No you keep trying but to no avail in your mad dash scramble.

Jim Crow laws were very specific in their discrimination and it wasn’t based upon income.

Now provide proof of your allegations or stop making them.

And what exactly is this stupid statement?: “You are so entrenched in your belief that more government and laws are
the answer that you can’t see the forest for the trees. Freedom and
respect for your fellow human being is the answer….for everyone.”

Ya know perhaps you should stop because you are actually hurting your cause.

CalCoolidge

Most everything is a distraction. Bridge-gate, the NFL, Lone Survivor

Laurel

I have to agree.

deTocqueville1

Wholeheartedly agree. Let the states decide. Focus on the big picture.

Sentinel

She’s WRONG!

CalCoolidge

All of her facts and stats are veriviable.

jay28elle

The Libs have so demonized smoking that anyone anywhere that breaths in smoke are gonna die tomorrow. But not one time have I heard anyone talk about these dangers of smoking pot. Maybe it does not lead to lung cancer?

Regarding this spreading to children – I absolutely agree with Bill’s approach here. Kids tend to replicate what their parents do and what they are around. You can say “NO, don’t do this” to your kid so many times until they distrust you about this decision. Hmmm, which just might be about the time that some other kid the child likes or looks up to says, “here, smoke this dope. our parents do, so it’s ok”

So, the THC being addictive and dangerous part of this the proponents are totally ignoring or mis-representing. By comparing it to booze is a bad cop-out. Long term cognitive disfunction, many studies have shown, can result from pot use. Booze has long term affects also, sure.

jay28elle

Anyone know if the Convenient Store Lobby Groups and the Snack Food Lobby Groups were behind funding and promoting this new law?

🙂

Amjean

The lefties ban cigarettes because smoking and second hand smoking cause lung cancer, however, smoking pot does not?

RosiesSeeingRed

It actually doesn’t — no TAR.

Edit: I stand corrected on the 2nd half of my comment, but first half remains true.

wraith67

Actually pot does have quite a bit of tar (plenty of links) – but people wouldn’t be smoking joints like they do cigarettes, and I used to do 2+ packs a day. I expect, however, they (whoever that is) will do the e-cig version of a joint – the vape device and a liquid you put in – so in no time, people won’t have to worry about the gunk (or the smell…can smell a pot smoker from 20′ away).

RosiesSeeingRed

Ah, I stand corrected. I remember reading that there is no correlation between cancer and marijuana smoking but I didn’t remember the specifics as to why. Thanks so much.

My son (age 27) unfortunately is a cigarette smoker (1-1/2 packs a week … 1-1/2 packs too many if you ask me!). We bought him an e-cig for Christmas and he likes it very much. There is no odor, and no tar going into his lungs. It’s a growing business, and ironically, when researching, I found that any “study” which claimed that e-cigs were unsafe were coincidentally funded by the tobacco industry. 😉

wraith67

Actually I don’t think anybody has any studies on pot smoking and cancer (Amsterdam maybe), I think all that is all “you’ll go out and try to rape a vending machine, steal a tank and then storm the Whitehouse naked” propaganda to discourage smoking it. I’m 46, half the people I know partook of a doobie, I believe most of them did fine in life (in fact, I’m getting astounded by the few that have died in my age group getting hit by heart attacks…).

Amjean

How many studies were done? It took years to determine
that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer; I doubt enough time and money has been spent on the long term side effects of smoking pot.

RosiesSeeingRed

They’ve been studying it for decades, and to this date, they still cannot link marijuana to cancer (though they’re finding something surprising — that marijuana can KILL certain cancer cells). In studies where adverse effects are found, it involves heavy pot smokers, not much different than finding cirrhosis of liver in heavy drinkers vs. those who drink moderately or occasionally (like the majority of pot smokers).

DarkHorse74

It’s still smoke in the lungs, how can it be good for them?

RosiesSeeingRed

I’m not saying it’s GOOD for them. Alcohol isn’t GOOD for you either. I’m just saying that people who smoke pot, for the most part, do so occasionally in lieu of drinking. Both, in moderation, are not harmful. Both, in excess, can be very bad. If we want to keep one illegal because of the small minority who abuse it, then we should make the other illegal too for the same reason.

deTocqueville1

Studies also show it can cause permanent alteration to the mental process, too. There are probably many substances we consume which might do that over time.

ObiWanKenobi

Marijuana is full of carcinogens.

deTocqueville1

Excellent point.

ryanomaniac

I’m on the side of legalization but it should be a state by state issue. This will be the only true way to know if there are negatives or not to society. I happen to think that if this society allows a substance that kills almost ten thousand people a year just on the roads alone and not counting all the domestic abuse, assaults and rapes, then states should be able to legalize marijuana. Maybe people would quit drinking as much in those states and therefore less deaths. We shall see.

RosiesSeeingRed

I agree with you, but it’s really a hot button topic on the right. People really hate it when I join the discussion advocating FOR legalization because they can’t call me a pothead, having never smoked weed, or a cigarette for that matter, in my life (and I’m 54 and in a very SMALL minority of people! Yes, I know plenty of conservatives who have smoked pot at some time or another in their lives).

One word of advice. When someone on the right calls anyone who has ever smoked a joint a “pothead” (obviously, an insult), by all means, ask them if they’ve ever had a glass or wine, a beer, or a mixed drink and then call them all drunks — alcoholics! Hey, if you smoke a joint every now and then and can be called a pothead, conjuring images of stoned, good-for-nothing people who do nothing but smoke pot all day, then by all means, one glass of wine qualifies you for being called a drunk. Fair is fair.

Conservator1

I tend to agree; BillO’s questions on kids and pot are good, but he’s refusing to face reality. Where I live, grade school children have access to buy it by the 6th grade at least. And I live in the same state as Bill. Also, the problem is far worse in affluent regions like Long Island where he lives. Kids can buy it for less money compared to Colorado where it’s legal.

I also agree that it should be a state right issue. Yet, the federal government has classified pot as a Scheduled I drug like herion. I really don’t understand how any state can legalize pot when it’s illegal on the federal side. Yet, on a federal level, very few people are convicted for possession. Selling pot or smuggling it into the nation does have hefty fines with long sentences.

The feds and states need to reconcile there differences.

deTocqueville1

Precisely.

Conservator1

Thanks, but I noticed someone disliked my comment and I can’t understand how that person could disagree with me, but not ryanomaniac who’s post I agreed with.

ObiWanKenobi

Distribution and smuggling drugs carries lengthy sentences in almost every single country on the face of the earth. It’s not somehow hypocritical of society’s that have thus far put the onus and focus on preventing that aspect of the problem.
And if I understand you, you think it’s time to “face reality”/ give up because pot is easy for 6th graders to get. Is it difficult for 5th graders? 3rd? Let’s assume 1st graders can buy dope illegally. What does legalizing it do to solve that?

Conservator1

Yes, it is just as easy for a 5th grader to obtain
illegal drugs and you don’t understand my point. When any new product obtains 10% of the total sales in its market, it’s destined to be the best selling product in that same market.

This has already occurred with pot and it’s the reason why Ham is correct about the government’s failure to halt the increased use and users of pot and that’s the reason I agreed with ryanomanaic.

Lastly, even if pot was legal for personal use, illegal importation of it will still be a crime with hefty fines and long prison sentences.

ObiWanKenobi

I still don’t understand how legalizing it helps anything at all.

Conservator1

I didn’t mean to imply legalizing pot helps anything. It’s another sign of societal decay IMO. But Americans have made their choice in usage, in polls and the ballot box.

People like Ham argue the battle has been lost and legalization will save billions per year in police, imprisonment and legal cost. Perhaps, but it has yet to be seen if legalizing doesn’t lead to increase of other crimes which negates these savings long-term. But in the short term, I expect there will be huge savings if pot is legalize and taxed.

ObiWanKenobi

I want to see the new surpluses from states like Washington & Colorado where it’s legalized. Jails house less than 1% of the inmates for solely marijuana related crimes. Truth is, there will be no “savings” from decreased police work and no vacancies created in our jails. A windfall of tax revenue should manifest itself immediately but has not. The damage from acquiescing mental midgets and hippies will be difficult to overcome. Mrs Ham arguing that we should all just sit back and allow hippies to proliferate is pathetic.

deTocqueville1

I agree.

Bob_Dean

Mary Katerine is right. The war on drugs has been a massive failure that has cost a fortune and has done little or nothing to reduce drug use. No one should be in prison for smoking pot. Addicts need intervention not lectures and punishment.

stage9

The war on murder has become a drain on society too. Our prisons are filled with them. Let’s free all of the murderers and rapists so that the whining tax payer can save a buck.

You know, if you’re going to devise an idea to save money, start with Congress, not practical and reasonable laws that prevent the moral destruction of our society.

welltempered2

Thanks for saving me the space it would It’s such atake to knock down that bogus “the war on drugs has been a massive failure” stuff. It’s such a facile argument, yet it’s spewed out ad nauseum.

deTocqueville1

That was not her main point. She starts from the point of view of personal liberty. Freedom of choice.

RosiesSeeingRed

Yes, let’s compare something which takes another person’s life to someone who would rather smoke a joint in the privacy of their own home rather than mix themselves a legal drink. Your hyperbole is astonishing.

Laurel

So is yours since you cannot guarantee that the person smoking the joint will keep it strictly to their home, remain productive, and never give it to kids or endorse it’s usage.

RosiesSeeingRed

Then advocate for outlawing all of it, Laurel. ALL, including alcohol and tobacco, because let’s face it, there is no PERFECT solution that keeps alcohol, cigarettes, and drugs strictly in the home, guaranteeing productive citizens who would never think of giving them to kids or endorse their usage.

We put bars and restaurants in the neighborhoods and draw people out of their homes to go drink there. Hypocritical conservatives don’t bat an eye at that. When I see the conservatives on this thread fighting hard to outlaw alcohol, I will take you seriously.

Laurel

You still don’t get it Rosie. Your logic is that of extremes. As I told you yesterday, and I will tell you once again, when there is recourse for victims at all levels of life then I will vote for legalization. Right now we don’t have recourse for victims of those that abuse legal drugs up to and including the taxpayer. Your logic is that of futility and wants to add to a problem. You don’t solve problems by adding to them.

I also find it strange that I only see you on threads of conservative sites that are about drug legalization.

RosiesSeeingRed

Let me get this straight. If you see it, it’s fact. If you don’t, then it didn’t happen. Do I have that right? By that logic, can I assume you only go to weed-related articles as well? Because I didn’t see you on one of the other articles I commented on today on another site on a totally different subject.

Laurel

I didn’t say it was a fact. I said it was strange.

And I didn’t posit any logic about you turning up on drug related threads…I posited a personal observation. Perhaps Rosie seeing red all of the time causes her to not see clearly. You seem to get more vociferous and emotional with every post.

RosiesSeeingRed

Absurd.

Laurel

Yeah your rampant emotionalism is quite absurd.

deTocqueville1

Exactly. Although surely you see a difference between pot and heroin or cocaine! Or do you?

RosiesSeeingRed

Of course I see the difference. I don’t believe we’re going to be seeing all those opiate drugs currently available by prescription only being sold legally in specialty shops either!

deTocqueville1

We cannot do that with alcohol so are you a prohibitionist?

Laurel

Nope. But there is no logic in adding to a problem that is self evident. And that question not only is an extreme but a straw man argument as well.

I tend to agree with you and have changed my view over time. I believe one should distinguish though between legalizing pot and legalizing heroin so I do not buy into the ‘thin edge of the wedge’ or slippery slope’ argument. The differences in symptoms of use and results are dramatic.

My friend lost her son to alcohol poisoning at the age of 24. He rarely drank, but just one time (and obviously at a legal age), he had a little too much. DEAD. Ask her if she would have preferred he partied with pot, which you cannot OD on and cannot die from having too much.

I never used to be for the legalization of marijuana, having never indulged in the stuff myself and not being much of a party person, but I’ve done a lot of research over the years and I’m firmly in the camp of people on the right who advocate for legalizing it.

And speaking of having the right to become an addict, wreck their families, become a drain on society and kill themselves, frankly, I just don’t think conservatives are willing to give up alcohol.

John Bohler

So true. Because being able to get high and become a pain in the ass to everyone around you is exactly why our founding fathers declared independence from England. Long live the Drug Addicts!

wraith67

Darwin should have his pound of flesh.

wraith67

Bill is such a toad. “For the children” has been a rallying call for about 99% of the [email protected] that gov’t has pulled over decades. There’s isn’t a high schooler in this country that doesn’t know where to score a joint. So much for the war on drugs.

RosiesSeeingRed

It’s more difficult for them to get liquor or buy cigarettes. That’s what happens when it’s regulated. Regardless, gun laws don’t stop criminals from getting guns (and the same could be said for the war on drugs), and last I checked, people on the right really hate it when the left paints ALL gun owners by the actions of a handful of sick or irresponsible people, but they have no problem painting everyone who has ever smoked a joint in their lives as a loser pothead (usually, while enjoying a lovely glass of wine or a nice cold beer).

BOR is a bully that is why he likes Christie and he likes Hillary and Obama as well they are bullies and go after people

ivan

Probably 50% of america smokes something, might as well legalize and control it. Also, make it the same case as with Cigarettes, tax it. We are spending too much on a useless prohibition. I don’t like pot; don’t smoke at all. An educational campaign should also be instituted emphasizing moderate use as with alcohol. Society is screwed up anyway.
A few random thoughts that are debatable from the sage from the communist city of N.Y.

ivan

Ms. Ham has to speak at 60 words a second in order to speak her mind before Mr. Interruptions O’ Reilly jumps in. Don’t know how she can take being interviewed on that show.

Amjean

Everyone has their own agenda. Hers is media exposure.

DarkHorse74

Yea and over 50% of Americans voted for Obama… twice. So I question their collective judgement. I have difficulty believing that you can legalize a mind altering substance without any detrimental affect on society. Whatever problems are solved by legalizing it will undoubtedly create new problems.

notsofastthere

The conundrum is the government made drugs illegal and that caused a big problem by creating a demand for it. A balck market was created. With POT they see a gain in tax for the loss of tax on tobacco. Actually, the government doesn’t give a crap about anyone but keeping control and continually growing a bureaucracy.

1tootall

I ignore Bill without prejudice. No need to watch him here, either.

thetallguy24

It’s spelled cites not sites

TxGold

MK was pizzed and it showed. I enjoyed watching it last night.

ClinkinKY

All hail the Great Bloviator!!! Meh! (In case anyone thought I was agreeing with him:)

Laurel

I can’t believe I suffered Bill O’Reilly…

First of all it astounds me the number of people who hate pot and smokers but want to legalize it. They are waffling on their morality so it’s no problem for them to impose something on the unsuspecting in society. They wouldn’t smoke it but hey it’s legal so you go right ahead. Ya know I wouldn’t jump off that 50 foot cliff but hey you go right ahead.

Next up the MK’s of the world do not seem to understand the societal implications of things. If pot is legal then there are a lot of idiot adults who will give it to the youth of this country because they see nothing wrong with pot smoking. They do so now despite the fact it is illegal. They must justify their own bad choices. Then we have idiotic parents who think they are going to teach their kids to be responsible with drugs like they do drinking…then they go on to wonder why they have out of control stupid children that often times ends up landing the parent in jail.

And be aware if pot legalizes all drugs legalize under the same guise and premise.

Calling the WOD a failure is a poor argument since it really isn’t a war and if you want to actually win it (which most don’t) then you stop with the moral relativism and start with sealing the borders.

I think in reality due to moral relativism we will get legalization and with it an expanded government and nanny state. It falls under the banner of social standards constantly devolving.

RosiesSeeingRed

1. I don’t think people who advocate for legalizing marijuana HATE pot and smokers. They just choose not to do it themselves.

2. I wouldn’t skydive out of an airplane, bungee jump, or try to climb Mt. Everest either, and hey, people DIE doing that! So does it make me a hypocrite to advocate for the right to do those things even though I don’t do them myself?

3. “If pot is legal then there are a lot of adult idiots ….” How many is a lot? Do you have the statistics on that, or are you just making an assertion you believe to be true? Do you think the number of people who allow their kids to have alcohol before legal age represent the vast majority of people who enjoy an occasional drink?

4. If this is a moral issue, then bye bye alcohol. You can’t expect to be taken seriously until you are advocating for the complete removal of these evils from society. And please don’t accuse me of “extremes” because I think it’s extreme for you to suggest that legalizing pot would lead to ” a lot” of parents giving it to their children.

I have thoroughly read this article and I find it interesting. It was well written and to the point. However you do realize there are many that will say you are imposing your religion on them I hope.

PuritanD71

Maybe, but isn’t it the same line of logic that states: you can’t legislate morality. Yet, that is exactly what one does when they pass laws in the first place.

Would it not be the same that they are imposing their religious views on me?

Nonetheless, I am glad you enjoyed the article. Have a good day.

Laurel

Oh don’t misinterpret me I agree with you and we can and do legislate morality since all laws are based upon morals or ‘right and wrong’. Even the concept of justice is based in morality.

I’m just preparing you for the dismissal you will receive since many do not know the origins of Western civilization any longer and that it is rooted in biblical morality, and even if they do they do not realize what that constitutes.

PuritanD71

No problem….. Thanks 🙂

Laurel

You are welcome and thanks for the information. I archived the article and the website. I think I will be visiting that site more often. Very well written.

Laurel

You have a tendency to use extremes that aren’t valid and fraught with emotion.

I actually have sky dived quite a bit in my younger years…but I did it with a parachute. I also drive a car. Far more have climbed mountains etc and lived. There is risk and then there unnecessary risk. And BTW…I wouldn’t sky dive if the pilot was stoned. that would be an unnecessary risk. Many people advocate for legalization strictly due to their wallet despite the fact they don’t like pot and pot smokers and have said so. Go back and read all of the comments at AT and here.

As to adults…do you not pay attention to the news and the number of parents and teachers that get arrested for giving drugs to teenagers. I don’t mean drug pushers, I mean adults who think they are going to supervise and therefore make it ‘safe’. Ignoring things that happen currently doesn’t bolster your point of view. If we are to legitimize something it must be examined logically from all angles. People have the right to do so, and clear thinking people have the obligation to do so.

As to your constant alcohol comparisons. It takes much less pot, especially the pot of today, to get high than it does alcohol. And btw society considers alcohol to be moral because most don’t drink to excess. For good or bad alcohol has been around much longer and is embedded into our culture and much of that is due to religion. I will caveat that though and say religion has also been against it’s usage as well and led the temperance movement. What you are trying to do is morally equivocate alcohol to pot by a very thin thread. If you are to do so and think alcohol is immoral and one must assume due to it’s inebriation then you must also think pot is as well.

RosiesSeeingRed

It’s just that I don’t think alcohol is immoral. You are making it a moral argument, not me.

Laurel, I enjoy a good debate and you are fun to debate with. My problem is, I agree with conservatives on pretty much every other issue, so I rarely get a chance to have a good healthy debate with another like-minded person. 🙂 And I absolutely hate debating liberals, who resort to ridicule and cannot see beyond the party line, no matter what facts they are presented with. So I never debate with them.

I don’t know if we’ll ever see eye to eye on this, but I was once exactly where you are. I have changed my mind over the years based on personal observation — successful, conservative friends who are very dear to me, all of whom have smoked pot at one point or another in their lives, the loss of my friend’s son due to alcohol poisoning, and my personal feeling that I feel any one of my children would be safer if they found themselves in a room full of people who are high as opposed to a room full of drunks. That’s just my personal opinion, but I’ve done a lot of research over the years. I understand both sides of the issue and understand why it’s such a volatile topic. Knowing we can never eradicate mind-altering substances, I find myself advocating for making them as safe and controlled as possible.

Laurel

And I was once exactly where you are and have changed my mind based on personal experience in law enforcement and personal tragedies as well as research. There aren’t too many that think drug abuse of any type is the key to success. We have societal problems already so why add to them but barring that at least put in some protection for the innocent and society at large.

And btw…when you argue to outlaw alcohol you are morally equivocating it to pot and thus making a moral argument.

My moral argument isn’t against usage as much as it is pointing out abuse and the immorality of drug usage creating parasites upon society.

There is no making a mind altering substance safe. If there was it wouldn’t be mind altering.

My view of liberty and yours isn’t exactly the same, but I do appreciate your point of view and agree we simply have a different route to what each of us think constitutes individual liberty. In the end, you and I want a free society which trusts its own citizens to act responsibly. Unfortunately, a few drunks, stoners and crazy people with guns are ruining it for the rest of us.

nibblesyble

Well done both of you, it was a good and healthy debate! Nice to see you Rosie!